I'm sure many on here will question this one after denying Schutt and DOB, but let's hope that if it happens it's because Hoke and co see greatness, not because the class didn't turn out how they wanted.
Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
"Potential Signing Day Surprise" - Willie Henry DT - Glenville
January 28th, 2012 at 10:04 PM
#602
I'm sure many on here will
January 28th, 2012 at 10:07 PM
#603
I didn't think we denied DOB
I could be wrong, but I thought he was in love with Tennessee.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:18 PM
#604
Word is we passed on DOB.
Word is we passed on DOB.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:38 PM
#605
I am all for it....
I am not sure why they passed on those other DT but I am excited at the possibility of another DT. I think you need a deep roster on both lines and this is the sort of guy you bring in for that purpose.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:25 PM
#606
We have a "nose" in PeeWee
This guy is not your prototype “nose” tackle like DOB and Schutt. We passed on them because they would fill the same role as PeeWee Pipkins. (And frankly, I think neither of them will have the career that I expect from PeeWee. I really think 4yrs from now we will be looking at an another at least All-B1G in Pipkins) I hope we get another DT also that can play on the opposite side of him.
January 29th, 2012 at 10:13 AM
#607
Curious
Do you think Pee Wee will stay for four if he is as good as predicted?
January 28th, 2012 at 10:55 PM
#608
posted from iPhone
I heard from a good source that his offer was pulled.
January 29th, 2012 at 2:05 AM
#609
This is the point
We pulled offers from DOB and Schutt and are now looking at another lesser rated DT. Star rankings dont matter, trust coaches derp derp, I'm guessing they ended up not landing some targets they expected and don't want to bank the scholie.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:14 PM
#610
Who knows, maybe Willie is
Who knows, maybe Willie is interested in walking on, and this is a Gibbs kind of a deal? It's also possible things have changed since Schutt got shut down.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:44 PM
#611
i duno..
Im not overly impressed with Schutt. Kalis app dominated him in practices, and I dont recall hearing his name in the UAA game.
Secondly, watch this kid (Henry) tape. He is a monster going up against not your typical HS OL..
If he goes blue I will be pumped. Looks like a perfect 3 tech
January 28th, 2012 at 11:06 PM
#612
Well
I'm guessing you probably didn't hear Schutt's name in the Under Armour game, because he played in the Army game. Also, not being overly impressed by a kid because he was dominated by Kalis seems a little ridiculous. Considering Kalis is one of the best offensive linemen in the country, I don't think getting beat by him in practices makes Schutt a bad player. I'm not trying to defend Schutt, but your reason not to be impressed by him doesn't seem valid.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:01 AM
#613
Ok.
Regardless of the game, I didnt hear anything about him. Even 11Warriors said he had little impact and was a non-factor.
http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2012/01/west-beats-east-in-sloppy-army-all-american-bowl
I justify my opinion on the fact that Tommy Schutt was facing legitimate top tier D1 lineman every snap at this allstar game and he did not seperate himself during the week. Most of the scouting reports on Schutt are "good size, decent technique and motor but doesnt dominate the competition". Seems to me he might be a big fish in a small pond, both literally and figuratively.
January 29th, 2012 at 11:31 AM
#614
Schutt
The real reason not to be impressed with Schutt was how the whole commitment thing went down.
He tried to commit to ND and was turned away. He turns right around and tries to commit to Michigan. Then he goes to Penn State. Now he's at Ohio State. It seemed like he was mad at ND so he was just flailing around for a spot without really commiting.
A couple days after the coaches told Schutt no sale, PeeWee commits and has been solid ever since. The coaches made the right call on that one when they stayed on target and with Peewee. Otherwise right now we could flipping out because Schutt, our only NT commit, just flipped to tOSU.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:18 PM
#615
Umm well not every other
Umm well not every other coach considering we and ND passed.
January 29th, 2012 at 12:31 AM
#616
...
You're goddamn right im adorable
Beats being the internet tough guy. Go upstairs and tell your mom to make me some flapjacks.
January 29th, 2012 at 12:20 PM
#617
Many will question?
I don't question anything Hoke and Co. do anymore, I have faith.
No lie, couple months ago I did throw a few questions out, especially regarding interior DL depth. But, if Hoke and Co. think Q, BWC, Wilkins, Ash, and PeeWee can handle the situation, then I wont question it.
(Perhaps a move to a 3-4 coming in a couple years with all the LB recruiting?) Is a question I wont ask, because Hoke and Co. know better than I do.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:07 PM
#618
Willie
Is ranked #38 DT on Scout. Nothing special about his resume and we may be smarter to bank that scholarship. But let's leave it up to the coaches as usual.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:18 PM
#619
You're 100% right. Our depth
You're 100% right. Our depth in the middle of our D-Line goes for miles, so it makes no sense to bring in a relatively low-ranked player with three defensive line-oriented coaches there to help him along in his development. What's the point? Three-stars don't do anything at the college level, anyway.
I don't get it either.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:27 PM
#620
I like this kid.
This is exactly the sort of guy you want next to pipkins. He is a little undersized, so he won't make an immediate impact. He does have a quick first step and is good in pursuit, at least from his highlights. He could develop into a TFL machine.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:50 PM
#621
Couple names..
I throw out a name you tell me if you think this 3 star was worht the offer...
Frank Clark
Jake Ryan
RVB
Thomas Gordon
Troy Woolfolk
Kenny Demens
Roy Roundtree
JT Floyd
Kevin Koger
Patrick Omameh
Jibreel Black
Stephen Hopkins
Desmond Morgan
Chris Bryant
Thomas Rawls
January 28th, 2012 at 11:04 PM
#622
You may want to check your
You may want to check your watchamacallit meter, cuz that was a good dose of good sarcasm you responded to
January 28th, 2012 at 11:17 PM
#623
And
That list may not be fully correct. RVB, Roundtree, Demens, Black, and Bryant were all given four stars by at least Scout or Rivals, and Koger was listed as the number 4 and 6 TE respectively to each site. I would say Warren is a much different kind of project, and it would be hard to compare his potential to all of these guys who are high three star, low four star guys. Warren is a middling three star at best, and will be a project, which I'm sure the coaches can handle. If the coaches want him, I want him, but comparing him to some of these guys as a prospect doesn't make much sense to me.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:11 AM
#624
...
What? People are projecting/picturing Willie at the 3-tech, most recently occupied by RVB. This list has a direct comparison, in that RVB was a 3 star (to both Scout and ESPN) and was an extremely productive starter on a BCS bowl winning team.
Also, who the hell is Warren?
January 29th, 2012 at 2:15 AM
#625
Henry
Sorry. RVB was a four-star to Rivals however, which you fail to mention. Comparing a 6-6 RVB to a 6-2 Henry seems a bit odd. I'm not saying Henry can't be good, but there is no doubt he will be a project. RVB's size and potential were much greater than Henry's when both are/were seniors in high school. Ratings-wise, Henry is a much different type of prospect then most of the guys you mentioned.
January 29th, 2012 at 3:21 AM
#626
Cmon..
Let me break this down for you.
1.This isnt basketball; height on the DL isnt that big of a deal. If anything, taller guys have more issues playing inside due to leverage concerns.
2. The point of this issue is that ratings don't necessarily mean "I will dominate". Saying "RVB had more stars on 2 of 3 sites so he is obviously a better prospect" is ridiculous. By your logic, given one schollie left, we should have signed Anthony Lalota over Omameh.
3. Coming out of hs...
Henry RVB
6'3 265 6'5 260
4. Watch the tape. He doesnt look like hes carrying bad weight and it doesnt seem like he's really a project. He's playing at Glenville, against some of the toughest HS football competition in the country. And he's running with WRs. Give me 6'3 265-70 pounders who can run with wideouts all day.
5. Hes a physical, large and athletic kid coming from a program reknowned for its football prowess. He uses his hands well, high motor and seems to fight through blocks. He has good penetration, but might overpursue. Seems to me like this is a no brainer. Factor in the depth chart at interior DL.
6. Give me a legitimate, non-Scout/Rivals starfucker reason that you see him being not on par with RVB coming from high school and I'll consider respecting your opinion.
January 29th, 2012 at 2:10 PM
#627
I never
Said a single thing about the kid's game. Simply as a prospect, RVB had much more potential coming out of high school. I'm still not sure how you are getting the whole RVB was a three-star recruit either? He was rated by Rivals as the number 18 DE, Scout as the number 8 DE, and ESPN as the number 13 TE. The type of prospect RVB was is not the type of project Henry is. I am by no means putting the kid down and I like the idea of the motivated middling three-star who is spurned by the non-ohio state offer, and will be motivated, and getting another kid from Glenville. I get all that and I like it, but to say it is a no brainer? The kid will be a project, which is a concensus from everyone around here, and if this was such a slam dunk, why are we waiting until three days before signing day to finally offer the kid. The kid is right in our back yard, and from one of the top high school programs in the state, so it's not like the coaches are just finding out about him. And I believe your Lalota/Omameh reference refers to taking a player at a position of need. If it was that big of a need, why did we turn down two top guys at that position? You can say you aren't impressed by Schutt as a prospect, but there is no denying he is a far better prospect than Henry. If it was that big of a need, I'm guessing the coaches would have taken or gone after a DT long before the "midnite hour" before signing day. Although a very good back up plan, it is pretty obvious this was a back up plan move. Oh, and thanks for the breakdown. I had no idea how recruiting works. How are you not working for Rivals or Scout by now? Do you really think Henry can run with WRs? If the kid was 6-2,3-ish with football talent and was running a 4.4-4.5 forty, he wouldn't be getting last minute offers from schools. Every school in the midwest would have already offered based on potential alone. That's laughable.
January 29th, 2012 at 2:26 PM
#628
What?
You are dense. A prospects worth is based on his play not what some recruit site has to say. I asked you to watch his tape. You havent. Because you are lazy, here you go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XNveNDm9So
Check out the 4:55 mark. Thats running with V'Angelo Bentley, a 5'10 RB/CB with offers from Pitt and Illinois and clocked at a 4.6 40.
We didn't turn down 2 guys at the position. Your football knowledge is lacking. Pipkins, Obrien, and Schutt all play the 1 Tech or NT position. We need a 3-tech, or a true DT. The difference is the 3 tech plays over the guard/tackle gap and usually ends up with 1 on 1s instead of being doubled like the nose.
And to say that he wasn't offered etc. as your reasoning is ridiculous. Maybe he didnt go to camps. Maybe he truly wants to stay close to home and only spoke with schools that are closer. Not having a huge offer sheet is not the judge of a players worth,
So again, I ask you to look past stars at the actual player and make a judgement.
Finally. Mattison passed on Schutt and offered Henry. That alone makes him the better prospect.
January 29th, 2012 at 2:35 PM
#629
The 3-tech and 1-tech
The 3-tech and 1-tech positions are NOT that different that you would turn down a kid you wanted just because he's a better 1-tech than a 3-tech. If Michigan WANTED Schutt, they would have taken him . . . and if they wanted O'Brien, they would have recruited him harder and more consistently. Michigan was wishy-washy about both O'Brien and Schutt, so they essentially Michigan turned them down.
January 29th, 2012 at 3:05 PM
#630
In the dude's defense
You say "watch the tape" and "A prospect's worth is based on his play, not what some recruit site has to say."
...I'm pretty sure these recruit site guys watch a lot more tape than you, I, or he/she does. Not only that, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say those guys even know what to look for. So like, recruiting stars are basically: some dude who knows how to watch tape of these HS guys, and does it for a living is telling you "dude, here's what I think".
Stars are not the end-all be-all. But are you seriously suggesting that you're a better grader than someone who's paid to grade? That's like saying "professor, give me the mic. You're evaluations on my doctoral thesis are not correct."
I'll agree with your Mattison point tho...
January 29th, 2012 at 3:46 PM
#631
Wow..
Never said I was a better analyst of tape than professional recruit sites. I have watched a ton of football and tape (specifically defense), and was giving my opinion . I was asking drewro to look at the tape and give me a reason that he didnt like the kid as a prospect, not just "starhhzzzz". He could have pointed to the fact that Henry looks like he gets lost in the shuffle a bit, or that he seems to play high.
Secondly, it might be that recruiting sites haven't looked at his senior film in depth yet. With all the craziness of signing day and the shifting of recruits based on Urban/coaching changes in the midwest, I dont think it would be crazy to say that.
Also, if you have written a doctoral thesis (100+ pages on one topic), you should know more than the professor questioning it. Your situation is the legitimate protocol for a thesis defense.
January 29th, 2012 at 5:45 PM
#632
Hmm
So in one argument you talk about how he plays at Glenville, and against top high school football talent. But in this argument you say he may have been an under the radar type. I hate to tell you, but whether a kid goes to camps or not, if he plays at Glenville nearly every coach in the country is going to know about him. His lack of offers is not because he has flown under the radar this long, its becuase coaches from across the country either didn't think he was good enough or didn't fit their scheme, and I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't fit anyone's schemes. And what makes you think he is a sure-shot three tech? A 6-2,3-ish, 270 pound high school DT could very likely end up playing nose once they get to college. And I don't know the kid personally, but I would be willing to bet money he doesn't run a 4.6 forty at that size. I will stick by my statement and say if that was the case, he would have offers from all over the country. Again, I am not bashing the kid. He looks like he has potential, and could be a good player, but noone, and I repeat noone is ever going to fly under the radar at Cleveland Glenville, period. Even if his idea was to stay closer to home, schools are still going to offer and try to change his mind. If he comes to Michigan I will root my ass off for him every day, but the fact is the kid was a backup plan, and the coaches are going to have some work on their hands. You say not to use the recruiting sites, so the simple fact that few other BCS programs offered is proof enough. And this all started on the fact that you called several of our previous recruits three-star types that weren't, which you are still wrong on.
January 29th, 2012 at 7:50 PM
#633
its.
I'd argue with you some more, but it seems to be fruitless as you consistently ignore anything I say unless it suits your narrowminded argument. You win the internet. Your epinion is superior to mine.
Frank Clark. Under the radar at Glenville. Suck it.
January 29th, 2012 at 10:04 PM
#634
Are you serious?
Frank Clark was not under the radar at Glenville. His offer list: Michigan, Cal, Michigan State, Minnesota and North Carolina. If Cal and North Carolina knew about Frank Clark, so did everyone else in the nation, which is my point. If you play for Glenville, or any school in the country that is a known hot bed for talent like Glenville, and are a good football player, coaches will know about you. Clark is an example of your original post of someone who is performing above what scouts saw of him, which yes, does happen often. Clark showed flashes of great athletic ability in high school, which excited a lot of us when he committed, but many other coaches around the country obviously didn't feel too good about him as a prospect. Henry is the same way. With all the talent that is at Glenville, I guarantee you nearly every coach from around the country has seen his film, and for whatever reason decided not to offer. Not to mention, we offered three days before signing day. At this point it may not be a bad offer, but the whole slam dunk thing that you suggested I just dont agree with. And I will stick to my original opinion that Henry is not the same type of prospect as most of those guys you mentioned in the original post. None of those guys were last minute offer guys. Again, I will also restate that I am not trying to put Henry down, and if he comes to Michigan I will root for the kid to prove everyone wrong and be a solid contributor to Michigan and society after he is done at Michigan.
January 29th, 2012 at 8:28 AM
#635
RVB was a consensus Four Star
RVB was a consensus Four Star - Scout, Rivals and a high 78 on ESPN which did not give stars back in 2007. That said I like the idea of Willie Henry giving us more depth at 3Tech and Scout shows his interest in UM as "High". He also shows some potential as an offensive guard, though I think we are looking at him mostly as a DT. FWIW I am totally confident that Mattison passed on both Danny O and Schutt because they did not fit what he wants in a "Michigan Defense".
Senior highlights:
January 29th, 2012 at 12:00 AM
#636
Just
responded to the wrong post. I get sarcasm, but the "hes only the #37 DT in the country" post needed some context.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:06 PM
#637
Dont forget Molk was 3 star
Dont forget Molk was 3 star as well. Point made though.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:07 AM
#638
..
No.. using Scout (I was looking at ESPN) the only names on that list w 4 stars are Black, Koger and RVB.
Using Scout, you can add Fitz Toussaint (Phil Steele All-B10 3rd team), Cam Gordon, Thomas Gordon(2 star),
January 29th, 2012 at 2:12 AM
#639
easy ... no, to all.
easy ... no, to all.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:41 PM
#640
January 29th, 2012 at 12:28 PM
#641
More mistakes by rivals
David Harris.
SAT: 20
They should really have someone edit those things once or twice before they put em up.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:49 PM
#642
As much as I enjoy debating
on this blog, the one thing I have learned to do is trust the Michigan coaching staff vs the bloggers. No insult intended. It's just they know how to judge talent better than any of us.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:22 PM
#643
You're right but look at Jake
You're right but look at Jake ryan's offer list.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:10 PM
#644
The mystery D-Lineman was
The mystery D-Lineman was supposed to be committed, though.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:11 PM
#645
Schutt
Schutt is the one who asked to visit and we respectfully declined I think. Henry's highlight video is rather impressive though. Looks like a high motor kid.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:14 PM
#646
Well now its
No surprise, is it?
January 28th, 2012 at 10:14 PM
#647
Honestly, at this point... I
Honestly, at this point... I would really like to get ANY other DT...
Obviously the coaches have got their plan, but I just feel like a huge rotation might serve us really well in the next few years.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:16 PM
#648
Well we saw what Mattison did with Heininger
Heininger was serviceable. So Henry could be a real sleeper. I noticed he has an offer from Illinois. Illini seem to do a good job with 3 star kids on their D line.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:17 PM
#649
Any DT
And any DT/DE should be excited to play for our D-Line coaching staff.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:16 PM
#650
Sort of puzzling, given the guys we're still after
I would think we'd save scholarships for the higher-profile guys we still have in our sights. I wonder if this means the staff have concluded privately that our chances aren't too good for some of them and figured the DL needs a bit of aditional depth. His offer list isn't all that impressive, but maybe Hoke & Mattison see a diamond in the rough here. They should know.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:19 PM
#651
We have 5 spots and only 4
We have 5 spots and only 4 "high profile" guys on the board
January 28th, 2012 at 10:25 PM
#652
Some players just fall under
Some players just fall under the radar. Not the same position, Dion Lewis had offers from just Tulane, and I think Miam (NTM) before Pitt offered him, and he turned into a RB with heisman hype. Not the same sport, but Novak had NO offers for BB. Who knows. Maybe they found a diamon in the rough.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:44 PM
#653
My guess is that they know
My guess is that they know who's going Blue and who isn't, and figured Willis is a guy with a decent ceiling they could turn into a player. The think I always forget about football recruiting is that you sometimes just need kids who'll be around for 5 years, fill in the gaps where needed, and be better as seniors than they are freshmen. Henninger is a great example on the defensive line - he'll never sniff the NFL or be an AA, but he's a good system guy who can help the team win. If you can turn 3* kids into starters at the end, that's a win.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:32 PM
#654
Is it Willie Henry or Willis?
Is it Willie Henry or Willis?
January 28th, 2012 at 10:23 PM
#655
I thought the surprise signing day commit was going to be
Tyler Orlosky because he is a teammate of Sam Grant and Kyle Kalis plus we need a Center and a Guard.
January 29th, 2012 at 11:12 AM
#656
If Brian is to be believe,
If Brian is to be believed, the guy is a D-lineman...and Orlosky is a guard.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:25 PM
#657
Do people really give a shit
Do people really give a shit what the kids Rivals ranking is if Hoke and Mattison like him? *** Frank Clark came from the same HS last year and was pretty damn impressive for a freshman. We should bank a schollie because a kid the coaches like doesn't have a high enough Rivals rating? Completely ludicrous
January 28th, 2012 at 10:31 PM
#658
I'm all for taking this kid
I'm all for taking this kid but I love how you just ignore the possibility that the coaches themselves are conflicted about taking this kid. I'm sure you would agree that the coaches must struggle with some offer decisions. I'm not saying that's the case here although frankly it seems likely given that they waited until now apparently to really get after him.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:53 PM
#659
I was hoping someone would
I was hoping someone would say that. I have come to trust what this coaching staff is doing. If they like him I love him.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:32 PM
#660
please tell me his last name is harrison
January 28th, 2012 at 10:48 PM
#661
No, but for what it's worth
No, but for what it's worth my three week old son's first and middle name is William Harrison. I'm trying to convince my wife that we should call him Tippecanoe as a nickname, but that's not flying so far.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:34 PM
#666
His film looks impressive
He shows some good speed running down plays. Glenville plays some real competition too.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:37 PM
#667
I also just get a big rise
I also just get a big rise out of getting anyone from glenville now...
Frank Clark didnt end up being too bad for us this year, either..
January 29th, 2012 at 12:35 PM
#668
Breaking The Ohio Stronghold
We ALL should get a rise about taking any live, moving, body with football potential from Glenville. Making in-roads with the coaches and younger players at one of the best player producing high schools in the country is never a bad thing, especially when that HS is a pipeline straight to the shoe. I think Hoke and Mattison have already shown about how much they value the star ratings of recruiting services, you know, like by producing a solid defensive product with such lowly 3*'s such as the aforementioned Clark, Jake Ryan, or Desmond Morgan (all of whom made a significant inpact as freshman). If they say Henry deserves a spot on our defense, and he's at a position of need, and it helps us potentially swing some of his buddies our way, and away from Ohio, in 2013 or beyond, I fail to see a reason why we should complain about signing him (if and when).
January 28th, 2012 at 10:42 PM
#669
only the 38th ranked DT? You
only the 38th ranked DT? You say that like its a bad thing.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:45 PM
#670
Right, also note scout has
Right, also note scout has him as the #38 player in ohio, ahead of grant and ringer.
January 29th, 2012 at 4:19 AM
#671
I hate to say it, but...
http://michiganstate.scout.com/a.z?s=175&p=8&c=1&nid=2847580
That kid was the 78th ranked DT his senior year, and a TWO STAR! 6'3, 245 .. v .. 6'3, 280 ... so this kid is already huge.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:51 PM
#672
I'm curious how he did againt
I'm curious how he did againt Kalis when Glenville played them...
January 28th, 2012 at 11:31 PM
#673
He did well in that game, but
He did well in that game, but it wasn't against Kalis. Kalis was out with injury at that time.
January 28th, 2012 at 10:56 PM
#674
Getting a pipeline to
Getting a pipeline to Glenville is what we want...
January 28th, 2012 at 11:02 PM
#675
His tape is great...
His tape is great... especially when he is on offense and is pacing the wr on a block. wow, can this guy run!!!!!! me like. I'd expect that he didnt do the camp circuits, and thus no 4th star.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:06 PM
#676
Pretty simple
Any defensive line recruit that Greg Mattison and Brady Hoke are interested in is a kid I am giving a chance to. I don't care if he had no stars.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:10 PM
#677
Well said
Agree whole "hartetly"
January 28th, 2012 at 11:31 PM
#678
Do you know why he is a 3
Do you know why he is a 3 star and not huge interest from top schools? The kids film looks very good. Must be a high 3 star then. for guys that study more tape, it seems to me he should have gotten more offers. Was it a camp thing?
January 28th, 2012 at 11:28 PM
#679
His ESPN scouting report was
His ESPN scouting report was so harsh, but most of it seemed correctable things with our coaching staff. I think he could develop to be a quality player.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:30 PM
#680
Wasn't Jerel Worthy a 3*? We
Wasn't Jerel Worthy a 3*? We may hate the guy, but he's got skill.
January 29th, 2012 at 4:21 AM
#681
2 stars
I hate him, but the guy is legit.
You have to give our coaches the benefit of the doubt on this one, given they're a bunch of DL coaches and this is a DL kid.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:32 PM
#682
Listen guys, MSU has made a
Listen guys, MSU has made a living under Dantonio with under-the-radar type 3* from Ohio over the past few years. I wouldn't fret too much over this. Obviously Hoke and the staff didn't like what they saw with DOB and Schutt and see something good with this young man. I have no problem with Hoke taking this kid on board and seeing what Mattison and Montgomery can do with him.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:35 PM
#683
i hope he goes blue. i have confidence in the coaching staff to make em better. we can all hate on msu and dantonio. but they have beat us 4 in a row with lesser rated recruiting classes. but a lot of that had to do with our pervious coach. in hoke i trust!
January 28th, 2012 at 11:35 PM
#684
posted from iPhone
He's apparently a true DT which we could use, he's a Glenville guy, and this late in the game it seems he's interested in coming here. I say come on down!
I'm not a big bank the scholarships type guy anyway.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:37 PM
#685
It is as simple as this...
on defense, in Mattison we trust.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:39 PM
#686
amen!
January 28th, 2012 at 11:39 PM
#687
We passed on other DTs
We passed on other DTs because Wormley will eventually play there. Godin might as well.
January 29th, 2012 at 9:11 AM
#688
If Wormley
is the 6'6 or 7" that he is listed as I don't want him at DT. Can you image the nightmare of trying to stay low at that height? I'd prefer Godin inside instead.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:45 PM
#689
Towards the end, was he the
Towards the end, was he the fullback barreling down the field for 40 yards? If so, I'm on board. He doesn't look like he has a lot of bad weigh, plus he has a good frame. He should easily get up to 290 lb. Pretty good athlete for that size, solid instints, plays hard. His technique is a little rough, but our three DL coaches will fix that. Hope we offer.
January 28th, 2012 at 11:51 PM
#690
that was him..and that was
that was him..and that was what was so impressive... he was PACING the wr....it was queer to see a 270lb player running with the wr to block.
can you imagine, if we recruit him as a FULLBACK???? sweet jesus....
January 29th, 2012 at 1:08 AM
#691
Queer?
Did you really just use "queer" to describe something odd? Are you sitting on your davenport? Do you make long distance phone calls? Is your beer stored in the icebox?
January 29th, 2012 at 12:03 AM
#694
Call me old fashioned but....
My dad would be my D coordinator he's the man and played D under Bo.
My offensive coordinator would be Borges cuz I have not contradicted his play calling this year.
January 29th, 2012 at 12:07 AM
#695
Wrong thread
January 29th, 2012 at 4:51 PM
#696
posted from iPhone
Ein Prosit!
January 29th, 2012 at 2:37 AM
#697
I'm confused
as well. What is this guy talking about??
January 29th, 2012 at 3:45 AM
#698
Whoops
Steve in PA is right. Not sure how this got into this thread that's my bad
January 29th, 2012 at 12:21 AM
#699
Who cares about stars.
Stars don't mean nothing. I look more at who has offered. His best offers as of now are Pitt, UC and Syracuse. I don't think UM has even offered him yet. They may be waiting to see what happens with the other recruits as 3 could announce by end of tomorrow. If they do offer and he accepts I have total faith that Hoke and Mattison know what they are doing.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:18 AM
#700
..
Seems like a kid comes on an official visit the weekend before signing day foreshadows an offer on the trip. You have to be invited to visit officially.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:31 AM
#701
Clean Ohio
He's got great potential to grow and get stronger. His offer list isn't too impressive but it isn't bad. He could be a great sleeper recruit and I wouldn't mind picking him up.
January 29th, 2012 at 8:57 AM
#702
posted from iPhone
His highlight film is pretty impressive. Really moves well and doesn't seem to quit on plays. How did a guy that big, who moves that well, not get more offers? He could be one of the major under-the-radar players in the class.
January 29th, 2012 at 11:09 AM
#703
I'm not sure if there are
I'm not sure if there are other issues (academics, behavior, etc.), but he's pretty raw when it comes to technique, so that might be a significant reason.
January 29th, 2012 at 11:18 AM
#704
Magnus you of all people know
Magnus you of all people know the potential positive ripple effects that could come down the road if Hoke is able to reopen Glenville to Michigan again. The doors have been basically closed since Pierre Woods and Glenville, St Ed's and St Ignatius are D! football player machine down here.
I'd take him if for no other reason than to get back in Ted Ginn Sr's good graces again.
January 29th, 2012 at 11:20 AM
#705
I'm not saying we shouldn't
I'm not saying we shouldn't take him. I think it would be a good move, if only because he's a big body.
That doesn't change the fact that he's raw.
January 29th, 2012 at 11:48 AM
#706
High IQ player
He took an official to Hawaii. Now that's how you game the system, young man! I like the cut of Willie Henry's jib.
Honestly though, if I were a D-I prospect, I'd be listing Hawaii in my top five, no question.
January 29th, 2012 at 12:52 PM
#707
sure.
Only because you own stock in Island Hoppers.
Say hi to Rick and TC for me.
January 29th, 2012 at 3:22 PM
#708
That was my second choice.
Unfortunately, no one offered me a recruiting visit there. It'd awesome if the did it all Urban Meyer style.
January 29th, 2012 at 12:26 PM
#709
As someone whose first name
As someone whose first name and middle name is William Henry...
Does that mean your name is William Henry William Henry _______? Quite the handle. Your last name wouldn't happen to be Harrison would it?
January 29th, 2012 at 3:20 PM
#710
No, it's William Henry. Duh.
William Henry William Henry William Henry.
